Glendale’s 2017 Mayors Challenge

1. Glendale’s 2017 Mayors Challenge Edward Padilla, Luis Orendain, Tamar Bezjian, and Danielle Huguenard

2. Partnership City of Glendale + Cal State LA + Pepperdine = • Success

3. Project Introduction • Worked with the Department of Innovation, Performance, and Audit • City of Glendale Contact: Greg Kajszo • Bloomberg 2017 Mayors Challenge • Cities awarded $5 million, $1 million, or $100,000 grant • Criteria includes: • Creativity, Positive Impact on Citizens, and Should be Quantifiable and Measurable • Announcement of winners in January 2018

4. Overall Project Logistics • Project and Problem identified by The City of Glendale • asked for our team’s assistance in fleshing out the details • Initially tasked with collecting broad information related to “Super Utilizers” (SU) of the 9-1-1 service • Research projects done by similar cities and identify stakeholders • Analyzed data, quantified the need for and effect of the project • Ultimate Goals: • To create a line (8-1-1) to reroute non-emergency calls from the 9-1-1 service • Create an education program for SUs

6. Timeline of Bloomberg Application Project • Sep 22: Introduction email from Greg including Assignment 1 description • Sept 24: Intro Group Skype call to discuss project • Sep. 29: Submitted Assignment 1 • Assignment 2 given • October 6: Submitted Assignment 2. • Project Direction Shift Email from Greg • October 13: Submitted Assignment 3 • October 20: Greg sends in completed application

7. Timeline of Extra Assignments • October 25: Extra Assignment 1 assigned (Audit Committee Research) • November 8: Extra Assignment 1 submitted • Extra Assignment 2 assigned (Fire Prevention Research) • November 12: In person team meeting at Santa Monica • November 15: Extra Assignment 2 submitted • Final Reflection and Thank You email from Greg

8. Our Approach • Assignments were split equally among ourselves • No de facto group leader • Expectations, schedules, and commitments discussed • Worked with multiple forms communication • Google docs • Able to combine, review, and add to each other’s work • Skype, 4-ways phone calls, group text messages, email

9. Team Dynamics Luis, The Investigator - Cal State LA Tamar , The Clarifier - Pepperdine Danielle, The Organizer - Pepperdine Eddie, The Backbone - Cal State LA

10. Communication • Within the team • Used multiple forms of digital communication • Did not meet in person until the end of our project • With Greg • Communicated via email only • Visited Cal State Classroom • Concern: Were the Cal State students getting more information? • Learned after project was completed that Greg only works part-time

11. Challenges • Team member availability • Geographic distance • Before Assignment 2, switched gears to focus on one specific subset of SUs: senior care facilities • Assignment 3 required us to call senior care facility administrators to ask them for their opinions about our project • Most of our team members got no responses

12. Feedback Received • Technical • Were able to see the final application • Group members maintaining communication with Greg as to results of the project • Professional • Greg was very pleased with our team’s work

13. What Would We Change? • Face-to-face meetings with Greg • Know about his meeting with Cal State students • More time with the project in order to learn the ins and outs of the issue • Meeting each other in person earlier • Extra assignments • More room to come up with a creative solution to the problem • Caveat: a looser assignment structure and less defined roles for project members means less accountability

14. What We Learned • Flexibility is Key • Everyone comes to the table with a different skill set • State clearly your availability beforehand • Good work is done when project managers are organized, clear in their expectations, and communicate promptly • We are a team and what one person does well, another teammate might not do as well • When the team wins, everyone wins